Which Editing Software?

Hey guys,
I have a 2 hour dv movie that I shot which is going to need a lot of work with editing. I was thinking about Adobe Premiere pro, which is nice but you need a 3+ghz processor to run it smoothly I have heard. I also want to make a menu and output the movie with the menu straight to dvd. However I would like it all in one so I wont have to export the video. exporting the video in microsoft dv format could take hours, let alone days if I use magic bullet editor filters (or any filters) which I want to do through the whole video (to make it look more like film). Any suggestions or ideas would be great.

 

Adobe Premiere Pro is an EXCELLENT professional editor. I've been using premeiere since its 4.2 days. It does NOT need a 3+ Ghz processor. My processor isn't even a 2.0 and it runs fine. There is virtually no rendering with the Pro versions of premiere now, so CPU speed is not a factor as much as RAM. 512 would be the minimum, but I'd recommend at least 1 Gig. Premiere also has built in mpeg encoding, so you can export your project directly to DVD, however there is no menu, just the movie. But a great companion to premiere is adobe encore. It is a full-fledged dvd authoring program, and is pretty simple to use if you are used to Adobe programs. The best thing is you can create your menus in Photoshop then import them to Encore, for very professional looking results.

So in my opinion it is WELL WORTH going for the more expensive, professional editing products by adobe. Using those MyDVD and other all in one editors are a complete waste of time, especially if you have a lot of editing to do.

edit 4typo

 

Take a look at Sony Vegas Movie Studio 4 (or Vegas 5) and Mainconcept EVE as well.

 

EVE is a baby compared to premiere. If he has a full length 2 hour movie with many edits to do, EVE and other basic ones would not suffice. They may work, but will not be as good of an end result, and probably take five times as long.

 

I realize the differences, but I also realize the price and the users ability (or lack of).
If Premiere Pro is definitely an option, then also look at Vegas 5.

 

very true, there is a major price difference, although most adobe prices are coming down alot. For the money its worth it.

I just found this online.
http://www.meritline.com/adobe-premiere-pro-tutorial-manual.html
For $469 plus free shipping you get the full versions of premiere pro 1.5, encore, and audition! That is an incredible steal. I paid over $1000 buying premiere and encore separately.

 

Alright I think Premiere it is, because I already have encore/photoshop. I also tried a trial of Premiere and its awesome, great editing software indeed! Anyway I have also been looking for a new dv camera. Would you guys recommend the optura xi? Or is there a more professional solution. Because I would rather cut the crap like taking digital photos and all that. However the Optura Xi as some nice features, such as: The RGB filter (similar to a 3ccd), Optical image stabilizer, zebra stribes (for over exposure solutions.), also you can adjust the shutter speed etc. However I really like that Panasonic one that shoots in 24p. However that camera is out of my budget.

 

well it all depends on what your budget is for a camera. I would definately recommend a 3 chip for sure, but you could go pro-sumer or full professional depending on your budget. Brand wise Sony and Canon are pretty much on top. If money was an issue, I would go for a Sony TRV-900. Its a very nice pro-sumer 3 chip. Sony doesn't make them anymore, but you can pick up ones on ebay. They are very durable cameras. After that the pros are like a Sony PD-150 or Canon GL-1.

 

instead of buying premiere + other software, buy a mac price is the same and you get a lot more than just a video editor. and you get to make the menu´s too all in the same evening you open the packet.

seriously, i use premiere pro at work and it sucks. it is not as buggy as past premieres, but it still stinks. i wish my boss would buy me final cut pro...well, he doesn´t know macs just are better for photo/video-stuff.

and before you start to shout at me, i´ve used windows&dos at work for the last 15 years (linux for 2 years and mac for 1 at home) doing 3d/video/photoshop/compositing etc. my attitude changed completely after os x came out. before that, i was a windows-guy. sigh...

 

I couldn't disagree with you more. I am forced to use macs at the college I teach at, and they are absolutely awful. OS X has no advantages over win XP. You can do so much more with a REAL computer its ridiculous. That and 95% of the software made out there is only for PC. Back in the dos and win95 days, yes, PCs weren't as stable as macs. But with win2000 and winxp they are way more reliable. Our stupidly expensive G5s have all crashed numerous times this semester...and they're brand new!

Final Cut is not a very good editing software. I would take Premiere Pro over it anyday. Well, honestly I'd take an Avid Xpress system over it anyday. Premiere is just a pro-sumer editor, where as Final Cut is a wannabe professional editor. Doesn't quite make it. It is such a pain in the ass to use compared to Premiere or Avid.

And besides, you go out and spend 3 to 4 grand on a G5, that still leaves you with nothing. It comes with what, IMovie? Yeah, you can really do a lot with that. You'd have to shell out another grand for Final Cut. Such a rip off its unbeleivable. For five grand you could build a PC that could smoke 5 G5 macs, and have money to buy an entire editing system like Avid Xpress with a MOJO card, and probably a decent DV camera as well! Macs suck. Do yourself a favor and use REAL COMPUTERS.

 

here's some interesting reading material

benchmark tests show for editing PCs smoke MACS:
http://www.digitalvideoediting.com/2002/11_nov/reviews/cw_macvspciii.htm

apple cheats on their G5 benchmark tests:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2003/06/24/apple_accused_of_cheating_over/

 

Hey djscoop I found a canon GL1 for 500 on ebay with little use, I also found a gl2 for 710 which has pretty much never been used. (3 hours). However I dont know if I can trust ebay. Is there a huge difference in the GL1 and GL2?

 

theres really not a huge difference between the GL1 and GL2. if it were me I'd go with the GL1. among some small advantages, the GL2 has XLR mic inputs, whereas the GL1 only has 1/8". but there's not a major difference until you step up to the XL series. for $500 a GL1 is a great deal. I've bought and sold over 400 items on ebay, and 99% have been positive. but for an item like this, definately contact the seller before you bid and ask for as many details as possible.

 

djscoop, you really are overreacting. if you don´t know anything about macs, their *nix background and the benefits of that or compatibility with existing soft-/hardware, then you could just say so.
OS 9 was crap. OS X is the most advanced desktop os made to date.
and video editing is not about processor speed. it is about usability of the editing station and your gadgets.
oh, and a mac is a real computer. pixar uses them, too and they have the biggest cluster next to us army (which uses windows 2000 to strand their missile boats on sea )

 

OOOOH! Pixar uses them too! I'd better give up my PC immediately and get a G5. Wait! I have to go spend another grand on software, on top of the inflated price of a translucent cheeze grater...
(Sorry, I couldn't resist)

 

lol, no you don´t. and i don´t hate windows, i believe it can co-exist even there are superior systems available my point is not to flame premiere or windows, but to say that a mac is one way to go. it is stupid to discard an option without consideration.
the world is not black&white, it is full of colors.

and btw, i haven´t spent any money on software. i use only open source anyway, and that works very nicely with a mac. the mac itself was still quite expensive...but it has been the best computer i have ever owned (including vic-20, my very first speed-monster)

 

I'm not overreacting, I just feel very strongly about the subject. like you said, macs are one way to go, if you want to go the super-expensive route and have a computer slower than any PC out there, and have virtually no software that works for it. you mentioned speed/processor performance, well if you would have read the first post I wrote on this thread, thats exactly what I said. in video editing, RAM and video card performance is more of an issure, except when it comes to rendering and encoding, which is processor heavy.

so the moral of the story is: to each his own. but I will always continue to argue with people claiming macs are just as good as PCs.

 

i just don´t understand the "virtually-no-software"-argument. every application you need is available on OS X. it is unix-clone and can run same programs as linux/bsd, in addition to it´s native programs and windows emulator for inhouse-windows-software.
for example, i have kde and gnome installed in os x. and i can run any linux program remotely from any linux box.
the number of software may not be as great as for windows, but 99% of windows software is quite stupid (who want´s to grow a desktop plant anyway).
windows is for home-users who like paperclips, dogs, speech bubbles and games. mac doesn´t have those, instead it has a streamlined ui and unix roots. you cannot argue that windows is better in any way. linux pc is great, but windows is just plain stupid os and it spoils the nice x86 hardware.

 

Firstly, Read this performance mac/pc graph, and the price graph. also. http://mac-sucks.com/facts_price.php

When mac ripped off the start menu, not only did they make it HUGE and pointless, they ruined the main purpose of it. Heres my favorite, taken from http://www.asktog.com/columns/044top10docksucks.html (check that link out!)

[bold]The Dock is big and clumsy

The Dock by default sucks up around 70 pixels square minimum, more than four times as much vertical space as either the Windows task bar or the Macintosh menu bar. (Yes, you can set it much smaller, but then you make it progressively more difficult to identify an icon without "scrubbing" the screen with your mouse to reveal its label.) Couple that with Apple's move to 16:9 wide screens (read: short screens), and you have a real problem. For good measure, add in the Dock's habit of floating on top of working windows, and you have little choice but to hide it.[/bold]


Here, kind of hard to read/understand but here

Computer: HP Pavillion 2600+ iMac G4
Processor: 2.08Ghz AMD Athlon XP 1Ghz PowerPC G4
Memory: 512MB RAM 256MB RAM

Storage: 120.0GB Ultra DMA hard drive 80GB Ultra
ATA/100; 7200 rpm
Monitor: (Not included) 17" TFT Widescreen display
Bus Speed: 333Mhz 266Mhz
Price: $679.99 $1,799.99


heres how user friendly they are, on OSX things like this pop up.






more to come!

 

-price/performance is not that simple. my powerbook has Gb ethernet, wlan/g, bluetooth, fw400&800, very small power adapter, ambient light sensor, backlit keyboard, 4,5hrs battery life when watching movies, over 2weeks standby, no fan noise (except when @100% cpu) etc. and everything works as adverised, no problems ever. so, the hardware is good.
-OS X has windows networking, unix networking, apple networking. it has bash for efficient command-line-usage. it comes with developer tools (including gcc/++) and X11. it reads&writes all kinds of file systems (including ntfs). it has no registry or similar hellish inventions to bog down system or cause instability/insecurity. it has open-source roots, and it is constantly developed by users (excluding gui).
-dock is optional, you can use other means to launch programs and manage documents.
i like pc (x86) hardware. it works great with linux, is very cost-efficient and can be used to whatever task. i use them every day. but i also like apple, because they make the absolutely best laptops.
i use windows at work every day, but it is never again coming to my home. linux & os x fill every need and do it better.